<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2018 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'<{title}>' => 'Vinegar, not lemon juice',
	'takedown' => '2017-11-01',
	'<{body}>' => <<<END
<img src="/img/CC_BY-SA_4.0/y.st./weblog/2018/05/13.jpg" alt="The complex at night" class="framed-centred-image" width="649" height="480"/>
<section id="recipe">
	<h2>Recipe</h2>
	<p>
		The other day, a coworker was trying to help me with my ranch recipe.
		I wasn&apos;t asking for help, though if they had some useful ideas, I would&apos;ve used them.
		However, they were trying to fix something that I didn&apos;t feel was a problem.
		The ranch thickens as it cools, so if you make it at the right consistency, it won&apos;t keep that consistency for when you use it.
		My solution is to make the dressing thinner.
		That way, when it thickens, it&apos;ll be perfect.
		I&apos;m just trying to locate the right ingredient ration now to make that happen.
		They wanted to fix the thickening though, as if the thickening were the problem, not my lack of knowledge of the correct ratios to use.
		They wanted me to switch the vinegar out for lemon juice, giving it the acidic kick, but supposedly reducing the thickening.
		I ... don&apos;t really want to keep lemon juice on hand though.
		Vinegar&apos;s easier, it doesn&apos;t need to be refrigerated.
		Also, when the dressing thickens, that means I can make it thinner, using less vegan mayonnaise.
		The mayonnaise is the expensive part, so if I remove whatever is making this stuff thicken as it cools, the dressing will be more expensive to make.
		If the vinegar is acting as a thickening agent for the mayo, it needs to <strong>*stay*</strong>!
		I wasn&apos;t sure how to put that without sounding rude though, like I was rejecting their idea.
		Then again, that&apos;s exactly what I was doing: rejecting that idea.
	</p>
	<p>
		Anyway, a neighbour was talking about store-bought ranch dressing, and how they don&apos;t like the vinegar in it.
		After some talking, they brought up a good point: vinegar is a <strong>*preservative*</strong>!
		By including vinegar in my recipe, I&apos;m likely making it keep much better.
		If I used lemon juice, I&apos;d have to worry more about spoilage.
		I mean, lemon juice is acidic, but if it had the preservative properties of vinegar, it wouldn&apos;t need to be refrigerated, right?
		Come to think of it, what is it about vinegar that keeps bacteria at bay?
		Maybe I&apos;ll look that up later if time allows and I remember.
	</p>
	<p>
		I had another batch I made, and as expected, it thickened too much.
		I didn&apos;t use any this time though, so I was able to add more soy milk and vinegar to thin it out and still know how much of everything was in there.
		I&apos;ll check on it tomorrow.
		My current recipe is as follows:
	</p>
	<ul>
		<li>
			450 grams of vegan mayonnaise
		</li>
		<li>
			80 grams of distilled white vinegar
		</li>
		<li>
			270 grams of soy milk
		</li>
		<li>
			14 grams of onion powder
		</li>
		<li>
			14 grams of garlic powder
		</li>
		<li>
			5 grams of dried parsley
		</li>
		<li>
			5 grams of dried dill
		</li>
		<li>
			1 grams of salt
		</li>
	</ul>
</section>
<section id="Minetest">
	<h2>Minetest</h2>
	<p>
		I had an epiphany today about <code>minequest</code>: the sand-harvesting bonus I&apos;ve been wanting to use is much more powerful than I&apos;d initially given it credit for.
		I&apos;ve been underestimating it, but a simple fact remains: it&apos;s presence or lack thereof will make or break my plans for the massive sandstone tunnel network.
		There is simply no other feasible way to gather the sane I need without spending most of my time not working on the tunnel itself.
		I don&apos;t need all the harvest-related bonuses, just that one.
		I can pull this off within the limitations of the mod&apos;s intent.
		I&apos;ll continue the <code>minequest</code> project.
	</p>
</section>
<section id="drudgery">
	<h2>Drudgery</h2>
	<p>
		My discussion post for the day:
	</p>
	<blockquote>
		<p>
			The first major drawback to distance vector routing is the problem of routing loops.
			The slow path-updating procedure can result in nodes having a different view of the network.
			As a result, they may disagree on which path is optimal, and route back to each other expecting the other node to handle the packet instead of just passing it back.
			Link state routing fixes this using flood-based update notifications.
			All nodes update their view of the network as quickly as possible.
			Path update notifications don&apos;t cycle around in routing loops, either.
			Each update notification includes the originating node&apos;s identity and a sequence number.
			A table is kept with the last known sequence number from each node, so received updates are ignored if they&apos;re repeats of past messages.
			A node may receive the same update message multiple times from different links, but it&apos;ll never pass on these duplicates.
		</p>
		<p>
			Secondly, the low value of &quot;infinity&quot; was a problem, as it prevented longer paths from being usable.
			However, I&apos;m still not clear on why having &quot;infinity&quot; be represented by an actual integer was advantages beyond the ability to store it in the same tables without a special marker.
			Setting the value that represents &quot;infinity&quot; to a lower values was supposed to help with the issue of the disjointed view of the network, but I can&apos;t for the life of me fathom how such would help.
			&quot;Infinity&quot; is the cost of reaching an unreachable node, not the network view update interval.
			If someone understands this and could explain it better, I&apos;d greatly appreciate that.
		</p>
		<p>
			Link state routing has a couple other advantages too.
			Probably most importantly, there no waiting for information about a new route when an older route ceases to function.
			The routers keep track of all available routes at any given time, so a new path can be plotted from that information right away.
			In distance vector routing, only the &quot;optimal&quot; (as defined by the administrator-chosen heuristic) path is known stored, so when that path is no longer working, a fallback path isn&apos;t known right away.
			Link state routing also allows different routes to be chosen based on attributes of the traffic.
			For example, traffic that uses different ports or has different latency requirements can be handled differently.
		</p>
		<div class="APA_references">
			<h3>References:</h3>
			<p>
				Dordal, P. (2014). 9 Routing-Update Algorithms - An Introduction to Computer Networks, edition 1.9.10. Retrieved from <a href="https://intronetworks.cs.luc.edu/current/html/routing.html"><code>https://intronetworks.cs.luc.edu/current/html/routing.html</code></a>
			</p>
		</div>
	</blockquote>
</section>
END
);
